By continuing to use the site or forum, you agree to the use of cookies, find out more by reading our GDPR policy

Tech censorship is nothing new, but a recent spate of permanent bans from the WhatsApp messaging service has users the world over spooked. Here’s your guide to keeping your nose clean and avoiding a ban.
In February, WhatsApp announced how it intended to fight spam and abuse without the need to invade users' privacy. One of its methods involved scanning unencrypted group content and metadata (group date creation, group subject, group description, etc..) as well as the rate of messaging to identify potential scammers and other assorted bad actors.
What’s at stake. Some 1.5 billion people use WhatsApp around the world. The company removes over two million spam accounts per month, 75 percent of which are automatically removed by the app's machine learning algorithm. A whopping 20 percent of these fake accounts are caught at registration. The company prides itself on protecting users’ privacy, though with varying degrees of success, as recent scandals have shown.

For roughly six months now, the world’s No.1 telecom equipment vendor and No. 2 phone manufacturer has been cut off from the US market, while Washington has been lobbying its allies to reject the firm’s 5G technology over allegations of espionage.
Chinese telecom giant Huawei will grant a mammoth bonus to its employees for their efforts in resisting US pressure, Asian media reports. According to an internal memo seen by the Nikkei Asian Review, the company, which employs over 190,000 workers worldwide, will double staff salaries in October as “a special dedication award.” An additional bonus would reportedly be distributed to all employees with a performance rating higher than C, who haven’t been reported for information security violations. The South China Morning Post clarifies, citing Huawei employees who spoke on condition of anonymity, that the double salary will be allocated to the employee bank accounts on Friday, 15 November, just days after China’s Black Friday-style shopping holiday known as Singles Day.
The separate cash bonus is said to be worth a whopping 2 billion yuan, or $285 million, according to the South China Morning Post, it will be shared among people working in R&D, especially at Huawei’s chip-making subsidiary HiSilicon and the developers of Huawei’s in-house operating systems.

A Wall Street regulator is opening a probe into Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s credit card practices after a viral tweet from a tech entrepreneur alleged gender discrimination in the new Apple Card’s algorithms when determining credit limits. A series of posts from David Heinemeier Hansson starting Thursday railed against the Apple Card for giving him 20 times the credit limit that his wife got. The tweets, many of which contain profanity, immediately gained traction online, even attracting comments from Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak. Hansson didn’t disclose any specific income-related information for either of them but said they filed joint tax returns and that his wife has a better credit score than he does. “The department will be conducting an investigation to determine whether New York law was violated and ensure all consumers are treated equally regardless of sex,” said a spokesman for Linda Lacewell, the superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services. “Any algorithm, that intentionally or not results in discriminatory treatment of women or any other protected class of people violates New York law.” “Our credit decisions are based on a customer’s creditworthiness and not on factors like gender, race, age, sexual orientation or any other basis prohibited by law,” said Goldman spokesman Andrew Williams. Hansson said Goldman’s response doesn’t explain what happened after he started airing his issues on social media. “As soon as this became a PR issue, they immediately bumped up her credit limit without asking for any additional documentation,” he said in an interview. “My belief isn’t there was some nefarious person wanting to discriminate. But that doesn’t matter. How do you know there isn’t an issue with the machine-learning algo when no one can explain how this decision was made?” More details can be found on OUR FORUM.